MY OSCARS 2015 PREDICTIONS

Willkommen, bienvenue, welcome! Im Oscar Predictions, au Oscar Predictions, to Oscar Predictions! I'm your host, Half of Neil Patrick Harris' Face and these are my predictions for the "major" awards at this weekend's 87th Academy Awards. 

I know there has been a lot of controversy this year over some (read: a lot of) the Academy's choices and snubs this year. The result is an overall weak year (read: reeeeeeeeal white) of nominees, where, despite there being a lot of very good movies, there simply aren't many nominees that stand out. Typically this would make for an exciting Oscars where anyone can win. Unfortunately, this year seems to be a depressing mix of weak nominees and most categories seemingly already sewn up. 

But in any case, I'm going to go over them. (Because you can't tell this half a face what to do!) If nothing else I will try to give some thoughts on who should have won, whether it be another nominee or someone/a film that wasn't nominated at all. (Also, if I slur along the way, please remember I'm only half a face and refrain from making fun of me. You jerk.) 

BEST PICTURE

Ellar Coltrane demonstrating his AMAZING method acting.

Clint Eastwood & Company for American Sniper

Alejandro & Company for Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

Richard Linklater & Cathleen Sutherland for Boyhood

Wes Anderson & Company for The Grand Budapest Hotel

Nora Grossman & Company for The Imitation Game

Christian Colson & Company for Selma

Tim Bevan & Company for The Theory of Everything

Jason Blum & Company for Whiplash

It's crazy how the earliest presumed frontrunner for the Best Picture Academy Award has AGAIN had its hopes completely destroyed by political opponents who have little to no connection to the world of film - the first being Zero Dark Thirty in 2012, a complex and fascinating work dramatizing the manhunt for Osama bin Laden which was totally derailed and never recovered from the lambasting it received at the hands of people like senator John McCain. And now it's Ava DuVernay's historical drama about Martin Luther King Jr. and the 1965 Selma to Montgomery voting rights marches.

Selma, once considered and expected to be not only the front runner for the Academy Award for Best Picture, is now only nominated for two awards (Best Picture and Best Original Song) and finds itself embarrassingly far outside of the Best Picture conversation. To put it bluntly, it's been a disaster for them. Besides the late release and very little screeners sent out to critics, the creators were obviously blindsided by the vicious accusations of historical inaccuracy (particularly involving the film's portrayal of president Lyndon Johnson and his involvement in the civil rights movement). It doesn't matter that many of these allegations were overblown, done out of self-interest, and even complete lies. All that matters is what happened. The attacks on Selma basically blackballed the movie.

And that's a problem. Films like Selma and Zero Dark Thirty cannot be destroyed for their historical inaccuracy and punished ruthlessly while other historical films (like The Imitation Game and American Sniper this year, and Argo which won Best Picture in 2012 and had a final act that, while awesome, was 100% fabrication) are given a pass. If engrossing, intricate pieces of art with historical subjects continue to be treated in hateful, dismissive, and punitive ways, then clearly we are going to cause there to be fewer and fewer engrossing, intricate pieces of art with historical subjects. I hate slippery slope arguments, but the precedent that is being set does not bode well for future historical films. 

So, that was a roundabout way of saying that Selma isn't winning Best Picture this year. And neither is American Sniper or The Grand Budapest Hotel or The Imitation Game or The Theory of Everything or Whiplash. No, this year is all about the two bad B's - Alejandro G. Inarritu's Birdman and Richard Linklater's Boyhood. It's an interesting race. Both films are the exact opposite of what the Academy typically awards Best Picture. Both are smaller films, both are made more for the art house crowd than mainstream audiences, both have lofty ambitions and neither of them ultimately quite reach the bar they respectively set for themselves. While it's easy to see either of them losing to a film like Selma if what happened to it hadn't happened, either one could believably lose the other. 

So, which is it? The other award shows can't seem to make up their mind. No one, even the other major award shows, can seem to make up their minds. And, to be honest, until today I've been just as unsure. But I think I've finally decided. For the past two years in a row - after the baffling decision to not nominate Ben Affleck for Best Director for Argo - the Best Director and Best Picture awards have gone to different movies. First it was Ang Lee for Life of Pi and Argo, then it was Alfonso Cuaron for Gravity and 12 Years a Slave. I believe this year will be more of the same. Clearly, or for my money, Inarritu's work on Birdman is superior to what Linklater does with Boyhood. As such, I believe Best Picture will go to the 12 year wonder, Richard Linklater's Boyhood. But, how awesome would it be if The Grand Budapest Hotel won? This half a face can dream, right? 

Who Will Win: Richard Linklater & Cathleen Sutherland for Boyhood

Who Should Win: Wes Anderson & Company for The Grand Budapest Hotel

Who Was Nominated and Shouldn't Have Been: Clint Eastwood & Company for American Sniper, Nora Grossman & Company for The Imitation Game, Tim Bevan & Company for The Theory of Everything

Who Should Have Been Nominated Instead: Paul Thomas Anderson & Company for Inherent Vice, Dan Gilroy & Company for Nightcrawler, Jim Jarmusch & Company for Only Lovers Left Alive, Jonathan Glazer & Company for Under the Skin

BEST DIRECTOR

Alejandro G. Inarritu for Birdman or (TUVI)

Richard Linklater for Boyhood

Bennett Miller for Foxcatcher

Wes Anderson for The Grand Budapest Hotel

Morten Tyldum for The Imitation Game

If this were a horse race, three of the horses would have been shot by the starter gun before even making it out of the gate. This category is either Inarritu's and Linklater's to win. It's hard to say who has the advantage in the voters' eyes (it's minuscule if it even exists), but if I had to place a bet on it I would go with Inarritu in part because of all the recent wins for Birdman. As for the movies themselves, a solid case can be made for either one - for the enthusiasm Inarritu brings to Birdman and the utter dedication and madness it to took to get the film to look like one shot, or for Linklater's patience and humanity, the changes, declines and ultimate growth you see in his direction throughout the 12 years it took to film Boyhood. But perhaps they'll split the vote and Wes Anderson will sweep in from the starting gate and take it! ZOMBIE HORSE! ZOMBIE HORSE! 

Who Will Win: Alejandro G. Inarritu for Birdman or (The Parenthetical Nightmare)

Who Should Win: Wes Anderson for The Grand Budapest Hotel

Who Was Nominated and Shouldn't Have Been: Bennett Miller for Foxcatcher and Morten Tyldum for The Imitation Game

Who Should Have Been Nominated Instead:  Dan Gilroy for Nightcrawler, Ava DuVernay for Selma, Jonathan Glazer for Under the Skin, Damien Chazelle for Whiplash

BEST ACTOR

Steve Carrell in Foxcatcher

Bradley Cooper in American Sniper

Benedict Cumberbatch in The Imitation Game

Michael Keaton in Birdman or (Look Ma, No Parenthetical!)

Eddie Redmayne in The Theory of Everything

The Best Actor category is usually one of the most competitive of the night. But this year, what's more competitive is the catalogue of actors who WEREN'T nominated for this award. Just off the top of my head you have Ralph Fiennes for The Grand Budapest Hotel, Jake Gyllenhaal for Nightcrawler, Tom Hardy for Locke, Joaquin Phoenix for Inherent Vice, and David Oyelowo for Selma. If those were the five nominees instead of the five who were actually nominated, I would shed exactly zero tears about who was "snubbed." 

But we don't live in a perfect world and this is what we've got. And just like the Best Director Category, this is another two person race. If there are two things the Academy love more than anything else it's stories about the process of making movies/theatre and stories about people overcoming immense disabilities (and occasionally films about the Holocaust). This year is no different. And while Michael Keaton is superb for what he's supposed to be in Birdman, it's going to be nearly impossible to beat Eddie Redmayne this year. And that's a real shame. While I can applaud Redmayne on his transformation, The Theory of Everything just isn't a good movie. And sadly, Redmayne ends up playing the character's ALS more than the character himself. It's possible that there's another split in the voting or the Academy's love of Bradley Cooper outweighs all and he wins, but this year it looks like the category with the most potential will be won by one of the weakest links. 

Who Will Win: Eddie Redmayne for The Theory of Everything

Who Should Win: Michael Keaton for Birdman or (I'm Batman! No... Wait...) 

Who Was Nominated and Shouldn't Have Been: Basically everyone who was nominated. 

Who Should Have Been Nominated Instead: Ralph Fiennes for The Grand Budapest Hotel, Jake Gyllenhaal for Nightcrawler, Tom Hardy for Locke, Joaquin Phoenix for Inherent Vice, David Oyelowo for Selma

BEST ACTRESS

Marion Cotillard for Two Days, One Night

Felicity Jones for The Theory of Everything

Julianne Moore for Still Alice

Rosamund Pike for Gone Girl

Reese Witherspoon for Wild

This is going to end up being a lifetime achievement award rather than a deserved Best Actress award. But it's hard to feel too bad about it. Without a doubt, Julianne Moore is one of the finest actresses of the last 20 years. And she's been nominated for four Oscars in the past and has zero wins. I just wish Still Alice wasn't such a slight movie. Despite being well put together, the film just lacks the complexity of other films that tackle similar subjects (e.g. Away From Her and Amore).

But that's how it goes. Wild and Gone Girl just haven't gotten the award season pushes they would have needed to net Witherspoon or Pike a win despite their performances, Felicity Jones would have fare better in the Supporting Actress category, and even though Marion Cotillard was AMAZING in Two Days, One Night and deserves the win, she is a past winner and the film was seen be close to no people in the U.S. While it's a shame this is what its coming down to, at least Moore's performance in Still Alice is solid and her career as a whole is exemplary. For an upset you could go with Pike or Witherspoon (or Cotillard for the MASSIVE upset), but this is Moore's category. 

Who Will Win: Julianne Moore for Still Alice

Who Should Win: Marion Cotillard for Two Days, One Night

Who Was Nominated and Shouldn't Have Been: Felicity Jones for The Theory of Everything

Who Should Have Been Nominated Instead: Scarlett Johansson for Under the Skin, Jenny Slate for Obvious Child, Agata Trzebuchowska for Ida

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Robert Duvall for The Judge

Ethan Hawke for Boyhood

Edward Norton for Birdman or (Ignorance: The Other White Virtue)

Mark Ruffalo for Foxcatcher

Just Keep "J.K." Simmons for Whiplash

Just like with Julianne Moore, it's hard to be mad at the thought of Just Keep taking home the award for Best Supporting Actor. He's powerful, beautifully adept at both comedy and drama, and he's brutally, despicably magnificent in Whiplash. He's also easily the better choice over Hawke, Ruffalo who many people seem to think is one of the strongest elements of Foxcatcher but who felt to me like just a device meant to pull the audience's heartstrings, and Duvall who should be embarrassed to be nominated for such a hokey piece of shit that The Judge is. The problem is that Simmons just isn't better than Edward Norton in Birdman. 

Those of you who know me may no that I'm not the biggest Edward Norton fan. But he is easily the best part of Birdman. His first scene where he takes Keaton's character's play away from it and transforms it into something totally different, something real, is one of those occasional moments in film where you're reminded at just how much power an actor can have and the astounding heights they can attain through a complete understanding and manipulation of their craft. And for a while it seemed like Norton might give Simmons a run for his money. But, as the other various award shows have come and gone and as Simmons (just) keeps taking home award after award, it has become nearly 100% certain that he will be taking home gold this weekend. And, honestly, I'm okay with that. 

Who Will Win: J.K. Simmons for Whiplash

Who Should Win: Edward Norton for Birdman or (Colons are for Sissies)

Who Was Nominated and Shouldn't Have Been: Robert Duvall for The Judge, Mark Ruffalo for Foxcatcher

Who Should Have Been Nominated Instead: Riz Ahmed for Nightcrawler, Josh Brolin for Inherent Vice, Tom Hiddleston for Only Lovers Left Alive

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Patricia Arquette for Boyhood

Laura Dern for Wild

Keira Knightly for The Imitation Game

Emma Stone for Birdman or (Honey, I Shrunk the Parenthetical) 

Meryl Streep for Into the Woods

This is a stone cold lock in my opinion. I know that a few people say that Emma Stone has a chance to sneak in and take it, but I don't buy it. This is Patricia Arquette's award and it has been from the very beginning. The only real hurdle she really ever faced was almost being put into the Best Actress category which she would have undoubtedly lost to Julianne Moore. However, after she made it into Best Supporting Actress it has been smooth sailing. And rightfully so. No one is more important to Boyhood's success than her. In reality, it isn't even Ellar Coltrane's character's story. It's Arquette's. And the way she portrays her characters immense struggles being a single mother is not only breathtaking, it is the essential core of the film. 

The only real, sad takeaway here is the fact that perhaps the three of the strongest, actually supporting performances of the year were looked over entirely. Carrie Coon's performance as the sister in Gone Girl and Agata Kulesza's performance as the aunt in Ida are two of the most heartbreaking and emotionally perfect this year in any category, and Tilda Swinton's turn as Mason in Bong Joon-ho's Snowpiercer is a brilliant mix of hilarity and menace, while also being an amazing transformation physically and vocally. But with Gone Girl's award season run completely collapsing in on itself, Ida being one of those brilliant foreign films that no one in the U.S. saw, and Snowpiercer just being one of those movies, these three genuine and striking performances will continue to go unnoticed. 

Who Will Win: Patricia Arquette for Boyhood

Who Should Win: Patricia Arquette for Boyhood

Who Was Nominated and Shouldn't Have Been: Keira Knightly for The Imitation Game, Meryl Streep for Into the Woods

Who Should Have Been Nominated Instead: Carrie Coon for Gone Girl, Agata Kulesza for Ida, Tilda Swinton for Snowpiercer

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Not Pictured: Hugo Guinness. Unless he happens to be a Transformer.

Alejandro G. Inarritu & Friends for Birdman or (You'll Never Guess What the "G." is For)

Richard Linklater for Boyhood

E. Max Frye & Dan Futterman for Foxcatcher

Wes Anderson & Hugo Guinness for The Grand Budapest Hotel

Dan Gilroy for Nightcrawler

Besides Best Picture, the writing categories are always the hardest to pick. And while Birdman and Boyhood are sparring to see who takes home the big prize, I think there is a genuine three-way race for Best Original Screenplay. Forget ol' Zombie Horse this time! Wes Anderson is racing right beside the two heavyweight stallions on his penny-farthing and I think he ends up taking it (perhaps with a little nitrous oxide tucked away in his antique accordion backpack). This is Wes Anderson's category. Usually if he's even nominated for an Academy Award it's for writing. And since it's wholly unlikely that he wins for Best Director and CERTAIN that he won't win Best Picture, I think it's more than appropriate to award Best Original Screenplay to one of the best films of 2014 that continues to get better and better with time and viewings and one of the most twisty and unique to boot. 

While it's possible that Birdman or Boyhood could swoop in and steal this one away - alternatively, I guess we could see the Academy giving the award to Foxcatcher for the same reasons I gave for giving it to Grand Budapest, though they'd be doing so wrongly - I believe the smart money is on Wes Anderson and Hugo Guinness. And even though it would never happen in a million years, seeing Dan Gilroy win for his underrated and caustically amazing Nightcrawler would make my entire night. 

Who Will Win: Wes Anderson & Hugo Guinness for The Grand Budapest Hotel

Who Should Win: Wes Anderson & Hugo Guinness for The Grand Budapest Hotel OR Dan Gilroy for Nightcrawler

Who Was Nominated and Shouldn't Have Been: E. Max Frye & Dan Futterman for Foxcatcher

Who Should Have Been Nominated Instead: Rebecca Lenkiewicz & Pawel Pawlikowski for Ida, Mike Leigh for Mr. Turner, Jim Jarmusch for Only Lover Left Alive

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Jason Hall for American Sniper

Graham Moore for The Imitation Game

Paul Thomas Anderson for Inherent Vice

Anthony McCarten for The Theory of Everything

Damien Chazelle for Whiplash

This is the hardest major category to call period. Besides Paul Thomas Anderson (whose Inherent Vice is as anti Oscar bait as it comes), any of the other four nominees could take this. For a while, it seems as though The Imitation Game had this in the bag. But after it's loss to The Theory of Everything at the BAFTAs, it appears to be on the decline while films like The Theory of Everything and American Sniper continue to be on the rise. 

SWERVE! Forget all those other screenplays! Damien Chazelle's adaptation of his own short film, Whiplash, is going to sneak in and take this award home. American Sniper and The Imitation Game both have been part to controversies about their historical accuracy (though not enough to take them out of major award contention), Inherent Vice is Inherent Vice, and The Theory of Everything, despite its win at the BAFTAs, is still the second fiddle British biopic behind The Imitation Game (really the third fiddle behind the brilliant and criminally ignored Mr. Turner). I believe this leaves things wide open for the small but sizzling Whiplash to take home gold.

Who Will Win: Damien Chazelle for Whiplash

Who Should Win: Paul Thomas Anderson for Inherent Vice

Who Was Nominated and Shouldn't Have Been: Jason Hall for American Sniper, Graham Moore for The Imitation Game, Anthony McCarten for The Theory of Everything

Who Should Have Been Nominated Instead: Gillian Flynn for Gone Girl, Gillian Robespierre for Obvious Child, Jonathan Glazer for Under the Skin

SMALLER CATEGORIES

Best Animated Feature:

Who Will Win: How to Train Your Dragon 2

Who Should Win: The Tale of the Princess Kaguya 

Who Could Win: Song of the Sea

Who Should Have Been Nominated: THE LEGO MOVIE, HELLO?!?!

Best Foreign Language Film:

Who Will Win: Wild Tales 

Who Should Win: Ida

Who Could Win: Ida or Leviathan

Who Should Have Been Nominated: Force Majeure, Mommy

Best Documentary Feature:

Who Will Win: Citizenfour

Who Should Win: Citizenfour

Who Could Win: Virunga

Who Should Have Been Nominated: Life Itself

Best Cinematography:

Who Will Win: Birdman or (Parenthetical 2: Electric Boogaloo)

Who Should Win: Ida or Mr. Turner

Who Could Win: Unbroken

Who Should Have Been Nominated: Nightcrawler, Only Lovers Left Alive, Selma, Under the Skin

Best Film Editing:

Who Will Win: Boyhood

Who Should Win: Whiplash

Who Could Win: American Sniper or Whiplash

Who Should Have Been Nominated: Nightcrawler, Under the Skin

Best Original Score:

Who Will Win: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Who Should Win: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Who Could Win: The Imitation Game or The Theory of Everything

Who Should Have Been Nominated: Birdman, The Double, The Tale of Princess Kaguya, Under the Skin

Best Original Song:

Who Will Win: "Glory" 

Who Should Win: "Glory"

Who Could Win: "Everything is Awesome" or "I'm Not Gonna Miss You"

Who Should Have Been Nominated: "Hal," "Yellow Flicker Beat" 

My Top Ten Films of 2014

Hello again! Long time no see! Due to a lot of other writing obligations, I've criminally neglected this poor blog and all of you lovely readers. So, I spent much of these first weeks of 2015 catching up on films I hadn't seen from last year. (Please keep in mind, I still haven't gotten to see all of the movies I want. But after one final edit, I am official leaving my list alone. Though I will hopefully be reviewing the other ones as I catch up on them.) And in an attempt to try and make my absence up to all of you beautiful people, I thought I would give you my Top 10 films of 2014! (Better late than never, right?)

10.) Obvious Child by Gillian Robespierre

Proof positive that the often maligned (and often deserving of it) rom-com genre can still surprise in 2014, Gillian Robespierre's Obvious Child is effortlessly charming and hilarious while allowing emotion and poignancy to arise naturally rather than having it's protagonist bob and weave through a course of convoluted obstacles. Building a romantic comedy around an abortion does not sound like an easy task. Building a romantic comedy around an abortion that actually happens sounds Herculean. But Robespierre and her lead Jenny Slate beautifully (and refreshingly) extract every ounce of emotion out of every situation without passing judgement. Rather, Robespierre allows burgeoning comedienne Donna Stern (Slate) to reveal her own flaws and insecurities through her interactions with friends and family, her audience and Max (Jack Lacy), a one-night stand that sets everything in motion. Wonderfully observed characters give way to even better dialogue ranging from poignant, retrospective, even philosophical musings to fart jokes and monologues about panty gunk, and make Obvious Child one of the funniest and most interesting comedies of the year.

9.) Whiplash by Damien Chazelle

Besides maybe The Babadook, Damien Chazelle's Whiplash is the scariest horror movie I saw in 2014. It tells the story of a young jazz drummer (Miles Teller) who, in his pursuit to be the next Buddy Rich, begins studying under the tutelage of a monster wearing a man's skin (J.K. Simmons). Whiplash is one of those few movies that I was actually nervous about seeing, all because of the clips I had watched of Simmons' ruthlessly ferocious Terence Fletcher. And he does not disappoint, delivering a performance of such white hot fury, that even when he's calm, you're shaking in fear and anticipation of what his next outburst will bring. Even the quietest scenes in Whiplash boil with an almost unbearable tension and when things finally explode, the results are visceral and powerful. But perhaps most frightening thing about the film is what it has to say about what it takes to attain greatness. The film's argument that you must be almost maniacally obsessed with your one true goal to achieve it, that you must be willing to make any sacrifice necessary, be willing to corrupt yourself, desensitize or even dehumanize yourself to achieve eminence, is incredibly unnerving. Perhaps even more so when the viewer realizes to what extent for them the film's message's is valid. 

8.) Birdman by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu

Birdman is unlike anything I've ever seen. A movie made to look as though it was done in one long continuous shot, it follows washed up superhero actor Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) who attempts to write, direct and star in a Broadway play based on the Raymond Carver short story "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love." It's an intensely ambitious endeavor that costs him untold sums of money and exacerbates his various personal and professional relationships. Equally ambitious is Inarritu's vision for Birdman - a film that deals with mental illness, the corrupt, pandering Hollywood system, art criticism, the inner workings the theater and the interweaving and often indiscernible barrier between the real world and the world created on stage and on screen. While the particulars of how the film deals with criticism comes off as cartoony at best, all of the film's other positives make up for it and then some. With magical performances (Antonio Sanchez's drum score is a thing of beauty and Michael Keaton and Edward Norton are used to their utmost potential), magical realism and magical camera work by master cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, Birdman is one of the strangest, poignant and magnetic films of the year. 

7.) The Double by Richard Ayoade 

A film based on a novella by Dostoyevsky by way of George Orwell's 1984 and Terry Gilliam's Brazil? That is straight cultural catnip for me. The story, boiled down to its essence, is about a man (Jesse Eisenberg) who is driven to a complete psychological breakdown after his life is usurped by a doppleganger (also Jesse Eisenberg) who is better than he is at... Well, everything. I just love the feel of this movie. First, like Gilliam, Ayoade is a virtuoso of production design. Every single detail of the film down to the most insignificant detail is finely tuned. The Film also happens to be one of the coldest, achingly brutal, viscously cynical, deadpan tragicomedies ever made. But despite how cold it is, despite how much of a distance Ayoade keeps between himself and his characters, there's still that sense of Monty Python whimsy and absurdity that Terry Gilliam is famous for and a sense of genuine humanity brought about by Eisenberg and by Mia Wasikowska as his love interest Hannah. And despite the overwhelming feeling of detachment in the film, Ayoade manages a film that is surreptitiously powerful. Under all that cynicism and icy, often smothering stylization, there is a warm, beating core of palpable, truthful tragedy that allows The Double to emotionally resonate deeply with audiences. 

6.) Inherent Vice by Paul Thomas Anderson

Many people have been calling Paul Thomas Anderson's latest movie "Inherent Twice" and for good reason. Based on Thomas Pynchon's 2009 novel of the same name, the film tells the story of strung-out shaggy dog private investigator Doc Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix) who after being visited by his ex-girlfriend Shasta (Katherine Waterston), sets out to stop a plot involving Shasta's new lover and wealthy real-estate developer Mickey Wolfmann being abducted and put into an insane asylum by his wife and her lover. Confused? Well, the story's not really the point (and you may have to watch the film more than once as a result). Like many of the great detective movies, Inherent Vice uses its intricate, oftentimes convoluted procedural elements as a way of looking at the world behind them. And as a result, Inherent Vice is a deeply melancholic movie. What some people who call Inherent Vice PT Anderson's love letter to '70s cinema don't seem to realize is that it's set in 1970 for a much more important reason. 1970 represented the death of the dream of the '60s. America was still dealing with a Manson-induced terror and a world gone mad. Like Doc in the movie, the American people were caught up in a weird place - simultaneously looking back and looking forward. Is this movie ridiculous and hilarious? Yes. But it's also a gloomy and inspired look at one of the central points of American identity (with maybe a little film vs. digital thrown in there too.)

5.) Only Lovers Left Alive by Jim Jarmusch

Jim Jarmusch does a vampire hangout movie. While it may not quite be the best or my favorite film of 2014, it's hard to argue that Only Lovers Left Alive isn't the coolest movie of 2014. The film tells the story of two immortal vampires, Adam and Eve (played perfectly by the waif-like Tilda Swinton and Tom Hiddleston), one in Tangiers and one in dilapidated mansion in the heart of a nearly abandoned section of Detroit, who have seen hundreds of years come and go and continue to struggle to find a place in a world that has progressively less and less space for them. A beautifully dreamy movie backed by an amazing soundtrack (performed and co-written by Jarmusch himself) with a surprisingly strong sense of humor, Only Lovers Left Alive is unlike any vampire movie ever made. But despite the bloodsucking, this is above all a Jarmusch film and no one has a longer to hang out and ruminate on life than a pair of vampires. What makes this film so brilliant are the scenes of these two ancient lovers simply musing over the tragedy of time and the billions of myopic humans throughout the world's history and weighing them against humankind's ability to produce a Bach or a Baudelaire, a William Burroughs or a Tom Waits. It's a rock and roll movie about creativity, love, and a spirit that binds the world and the history of the world together. And it's cool, man. Cool.

4.) Nightcrawler by Dan Gilroy

Nightcrawler has the best introduction to any character (and any film) this year. In the first 10-15 minutes we see Lou Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), an intensely gaunt and creepy individual, viscously beat a security guard maybe to death and then attempt to apply for a job (after selling stolen building materials) using a perfectly polished sales pitch. That is exactly what Nightcrawler, Dan Gilroy's seedy, neon-soaked L.A. thriller, is for the rest of its runtime. Lou Bloom commits horrific act after shockingly sociopathic act and then delivers these speeches that feel like something one might learn in a business seminar. Nightcrawler is a blistering, tightly contained filmed. One whose cynical look at the state of modern journalism is jet-black and unflinching. And Gyllenhaal is the perfect conduit for Gilroy's caustic and often darkly hilarious indictments. Gyllenhaal is absolutely magnetic as he rides a razor-thin line, putting a dazzling spin on his moral-less actions as a freelance videographer selling grizzly crime scene footage to local news organizations while barely covering up his vomitous hatred for society as a whole. Without Gyllenhaal's performance, Nightcrawler simply wouldn't have worked. But with him, it becomes an uncompromising look at our own hypocrisy, pulling no punches on showing us exactly who is to blame for our current state. 

3.) Ida by Pawel Pawlikowski

Before Anna (Agata Trzebuchowska), a young nun in 196o Poland, is to say her official vows she is charged by her Mother Superior to learn more about her past. But little do she and Mother Superior know that not only is she actually Jewish (not too many Jewish nuns for those keeping track), Anna is not even Anna. She's Ida and her past is deeply entangled in her country's dark history during World War II. What follows is a stunningly beautiful spiritual noir shot in the 1:33-1 box of classics gone by, a restrained and austere investigation of faith, responsibility and the faults of a brutal time in the world's history. As much about Ida's revelations as it is about the revelations of her cynical and worldly aunt and only living relative Wanda (Agata Kulesza) - who together go on a journey to discover more information on Ida's parents who were murdered during the Nazi occupation - what's so brilliant about Ida is the way Pawel Pawlikowski's controlled direction invites the audience to contemplate on the characters' stories in the larger context of a country which, in a time of mass chaos, had unbelievably despicable atrocities perpetrated upon it, but also perpetrated them itself. Ida is a deceptively wide-reaching film, a story seemingly simple on the surface but with the power to devastate an audience. What makes it truly remarkable, however, is that it forces you to come to terms with the story's sorrow on your own.  

2.) The Grand Budapest Hotel by Wes Anderson

The Grand Budapest Hotel is by far the most Wes Anderson-y movie that Wes Anderson has ever made. It may also be the best film he's ever made (sorry Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums for me). For one, it takes everything Anderson has been known for - his gimmicks, his gags, his style, inclinations and motifs - and pushes them to their furthest extent yet. But it's not all of the different aspect ratios or flashbacks within flashbacks within flashbacks, everything packed in so tight and so full that it's nearly impossible to catch them all in one go, that makes the film great. It's that Anderson has finally clicked everything into place so that it works like an intricate, handcrafted grandfather clockwork, almost unbelievable in its elegance, making keeping up with all the twists and turns utterly delightful and consistently rewarding. It also gives the most deeply personal look into Anderson himself than any of his films to date have. As the Grand Budapest's long-time concierge M. Gustave, Ralph Fiennes brings to life an individual who puts forth a tenacious air of civility and propriety in the face of increasingly violent and sinister events. Like M. Gustave, Wes Anderson has a nostalgia for a time in which he never lived. And he uses The Grand Budapest Hotel and all its rigor and structure to silence his critics. Is there a veneer here that covers up a crassness underneath? Yes, of course. But Anderson has always had a deep understanding for that underlying crassness (look at all the pompous and pretentious characters in his previous films). Here he manages to finally delve deeply into it to reveal something extremely poignant about the nature of dignity, arguing that the veneer may just be what we need to ultimately turn us towards a better place. 

1.) Under the Skin by Jonathan Glazer

I love art films to put it bluntly. I love films that put their emphasis on the abstract and thematic presentations of their ideas rather than doing so through through a traditional narrative. But my love isn't automatic. To be a "good" art film in my eyes there has to be coherence in the statements that are being made through the thematic material. A "good" art film also has to be able to connect with the audience on a visceral level even if the audience can't exactly comprehend why that connection (and their reaction to it) is happening. Jonathan Glazer's Under the Skin does this spectacularly. Based loosely on Michel Faber's 2000 novel, the film has its fair share of provocative imagery. Floors that turn into deep pools of black liquid, full frontal nudity across the gender spectrum, a potential sexual liaison with a man afflicted with neurofibromatosis, entire bodies popping into nothingness and a mind-penetrating score, kept me completely transfixed while the coherency held. By the end, Under the Skin becomes a complete picture of the evolution and ultimately the devastation of femininity through the eyes of an extraterrestrial being. And in the process, it manages to create one of the most strangely beautiful and heartbreaking stories I've ever seen. It is not only an incredible feat to accomplish this using such abstraction, it is an inspiration. This is an artist's dream. And it is breathtaking. 

The Rest

And that's my list! Like I said, I haven't seen all the films I want to see yet and I wasn't able to include all of the films I may have liked to have included on my list. But I want to shout some of them out anyway. So, here are some odds and ends for the year 2014:

My Other 2014 Favorites (In No Particular Order): The Babadook, Blue Ruin, Boyhood, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, Edge of Tomorrow, Frank, Guardians of the Galaxy, Jodorowsky's Dune, John Wick, The Lego Movie, Life Itself, Locke, The Missing Picture, Night Moves, The Raid 2: Berandal, Selma, Snowpiercer, Starred Up

Top Ten Films of 2014 That I Want to See and Will Soon: Calvary, Dear White People, A Field in England, Force Majeure, A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night, Leviathan, Listen Up Philip, Mr. Turner, Two Days, One Night, Winter Sleep

Eight Movies That Can Suck a Fat One: The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Godzilla, Horns, A Million Ways to Die in the West, Sin City: A Dame to Kill For, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Transformers: Age of Extinction, Tusk